9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (5) TMI 696X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... R, for the Respondent. [Order per : G.R. Sharma, Member (T)]. - These are two appeals. As the appeals arise out of the same common order, therefore, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. The appeals are against confiscation of the imported goods, demand of duty, demand of interest and imposition of penalty. 3. The facts of the case in brief ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ring for the appellants submits that in this case a penalty of Rs. 10,51,358/- has been imposed on M/s. Haryana Agricultural University in terms of provisions of Section 114A of the Customs Act, 1962; that the penalty has been imposed holding that the applicants had wrongly availed the benefit of Notification No. 70/81, dated 26-3-1981 on computerised sucrolyzer equipment by suppressing the fact a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fore, the question of payment of interest did not arise. Ld. Counsel submits that the goods have been confiscated on the ground that exemption has been wrongly availed. He submitted that Haryana Agricultural University has their extension centres at various placed known as Krishi Gyan Kendra and Krishi Vigyan Kendras which are in fact laboratories of the University. He submits that with a view to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ity. He, therefore, submitted that confiscation was correctly ordered and penalty was rightly imposed as there was deliberately attempt to evade payment of duty. 6. We have heard the rival submissions. We find that insofar as imposition of penalty under Section 114A is concerned, we note that import took place in 1992 which is much before 28-9-1996 when Section 114A was enacted. We, therefor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
